free-range politics, organic community

Trump decides to use Dick Cheney's playbook for starting a war with Iran

Submitted by gjohnsit on Wed, 02/20/2019 - 5:06pm

This might be the most ominous essay that I've ever written.
It appears that the Trump Administration has decided to use the most ridiculous and transparent lie imaginable to justify a war of regime change with Iran.

Iran is providing high-level al Qaeda operatives with a clandestine sanctuary to funnel fighters, money and weapons across the Middle East, according to Trump administration officials who warn that the long-elusive, complex relationship between two avowed enemies of America has evolved into an unacceptable global security threat.

With the once-prominent Islamic State receding from the spotlight, The Washington Times has learned that the administration is focusing increasingly on the unlikely alliance between Iran and al Qaeda, with what some sources say is an eye toward establishing a potential legal justification for military strikes against Iran or its proxies.

Al-Qaeda launched a massive suicide attack on Iran just last week.
Iran has spent billions of dollars and sacrificed thousands of lives to defeat al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda related groups in the past eight years, so this accusation is laughable at face value. At least it would be laughable if the implications of what the Trump Administration wants to do weren't so serious.

Just like with Iraq in 2002, Washington is accusing Iran of working with al-Qaeda and having a WMD program. Both accusations is obvious lies.

Why recycle this particular lie?
There are two reasons. The first one is because it's the only AUMF available to the Trump Administration.

The second reason is more disturbing - because Saudi Arabia said so the day before.

..."Iran has been harboring virtually the board of directors of al-Qaida, including Osama bin Laden's son since the events of 9/11," Saudi Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir told a joint news conference in Islamabad along with his Pakistani counterpart, Shah Mehmood Qureshi. He declared Iran as "the world's chief sponsor of terrorism."

The Saudi Coalition has accused the Islamic Republican of Iran of supplying the Al-Qaeda terrorist group with weapons in Yemen.
...While it is not clear if Iran, in fact, supplied Al-Qaeda with weapons in Yemen, but the latter has been fighting the anti-government Houthi forces (var. Ansarallah Movement) inside the Al-Bayda Governorate recently.

So the reality is that the Houthis are the sworn enemies of al-Qaeda in Yemen, which makes this charge ridiculous. But it gets even more stupid when you factor in this CNN report from just a few weeks ago.

Saudi Arabia and its coalition partner in Yemen, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) transferred US-made weapons to al-Qaeda-linked groups and a Salafi militia whose commander who once "served with" the Yemeni branch of ISIL, a CNN investigation has found.

However, an investigation by The Associated Press found the coalition has been paying some al-Qaeda commanders to leave key cities and towns while letting others retreat with weapons, equipment, and wads of looted cash.

Hundreds of al-Qaeda members were recruited to join the coalition as soldiers, the report said.

Key figures in the deal-making said the United States was aware of the arrangements and held off on drone attacks against the armed group, which was created by Osama bin Laden in 1988.

So the reality of the situation is the exact opposite.
Our Saudi allies are working directly with al-Qaeda to fight against Iran and it's allies, and we are fully aware of it. But Washington is going to say black-is-white and up-is-down in order to justify the most pointless war imaginable.

Comments

“Since 9/11, the Iranian regime has given sanctuary to senior AQ members, and it remains unwilling to bring these terrorists to justice,” said Nathan A. Sales, State Department coordinator for counterterrorism, who has been a key player on the administration’s Iran policy team since Mr. Trump appointed him to the post in 2017.

“This partnership of convenience between Tehran and AQ is both dangerous and unacceptable, and it further reinforces Iran’s status as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism,” Mr. Sales told The Times in an exclusive interview.

The recently unclassified version of the U.S. intelligence community’s annual Worldwide Threat Assessment for 2019 did not delve deeply into Iran-al Qaeda ties, but it contained a map that highlighted Iran for its presence of an al Qaeda “Affiliate, Element or Network.”
...
Washington has long listed Iran as the world’s top state sponsor of terrorism. It cites the estimated $1 billion a year that Tehran sends to a host of recognized terrorist organizations, most notably the Lebanon-based Shiite group Hezbollah and the Palestinian Sunni group Hamas.

Nevermind that Hezbollah has lost over 1,000 fighters in the war against al-Qaeda in Syria.

in a related article worth a peek, moon of alabama (among other things) points out the hole in the argument about iran "harboring" al qaeda. they're hostages:

When the U.S. attacked Afghanistan some families of al-Qaeda fighters fled to Iran where they were put under house arrest. They were and still are hostages Iran uses to prevent al-Qaeda attacks against its country. The Washington Times admits this:

One captured 2007 document, apparently written by an al Qaeda operative, concluded that, in the wake of the 2003 U.S. invasion of neighboring Iraq, “Iranian authorities decided to keep our brothers as a bargaining chip.”

The Trump administration is preparing a public argument for war on Iran. The Washington Times has some 'senior administration officials' claiming that Iran is allied with al-Qaeda and thus could and should be attacked:
...
At the recent conferences in Warsaw and Munich the Trump administration failed to gain any European support for its anti-Iran strategy. Iraq has likewise rejected all U.S. attempts to position it against Iran. If the U.S. wants to attack Iran it will need to go it alone. Its 'allies' west of the Persian Gulf will give financial support but are not a serious military force. What they can do though is to ramp up terrorism against Iran.
...

@The Voice In the Wilderness
Because then they might become bishops, then cardinals, then you might eventually have a female Pope, which wouldn't work, so you'd have to call them "Mame", and that might all be fine, but then you'd have to change out all the Vatican stationery and the blessings and the songs, and then the adjective "Papal" would have to be replaced with "Mammal", which-

#4
the Roman catholic Church opening an abortion center with the Pope on hand to bless all the women.

up

7 users have voted.

—

“Remember, when the emperor looks naked, the emperor IS naked. The truth and the lie are *not* 'sort of the same thing'.” — Daria Morgendorffer

#4.3 Because then they might become bishops, then cardinals, then you might eventually have a female Pope, which wouldn't work, so you'd have to call them "Mame", and that might all be fine, but then you'd have to change out all the Vatican stationery and the blessings and the songs, and then the adjective "Papal" would have to be replaced with "Mammal", which-

...."Iran has been harboring virtually the board of directors of al-Qaida, including Osama bin Laden's son since the events of 9/11," Saudi Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir told a joint news conference......"

(Emphasis added.)

The Saudis using 9/11 to prop up an argument!?! Remind me, how many Saudis were involved in 9/11?

...."Iran has been harboring virtually the board of directors of al-Qaida, including Osama bin Laden's son since the events of 9/11," Saudi Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir told a joint news conference......"

(Emphasis added.)

The Saudis using 9/11 to prop up an argument!?! Remind me, how many Saudis were involved in 9/11?

up

12 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

..."Iran has been harboring virtually the board of directors of al-Qaida, including Osama bin Laden's son since the events of 9/11," Saudi Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir told a joint news conference in Islamabad along with his Pakistani counterpart, Shah Mehmood Qureshi.

Tell me again where Bin Laden was hiding when he was killed?

...."Iran has been harboring virtually the board of directors of al-Qaida, including Osama bin Laden's son since the events of 9/11," Saudi Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir told a joint news conference......"

(Emphasis added.)

The Saudis using 9/11 to prop up an argument!?! Remind me, how many Saudis were involved in 9/11?

up

7 users have voted.

—

"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X

Who's got the yellow cake? Can I get a mobile bioweapons lab or two? Is there a run on aluminum tubes? Don't forget the mushroom cloud. We have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here. I'm so glad Obama got to the bottom of all this. It really showed Bush2 and his band of war criminals who's boss.

Geography alone is an insurmountable problem. Remember how long it took to prepare for the Iraq invasion? Something like six months, and the US had a staging area. Iran's neighbors would not allow a US buildup to an invasion, and that includes Iraq who's legislature is about to kick out the US military. Iran has a healthy economy and military and military technology, unlike Iraq before the war. Iran has many allies, including Russia, China, and Turkey. Russia shares a border on the Caspian Sea and can ship as many supplies as needed to Iran. Iran, I believe has S400 air defense systems and lots of ground to ground and ground to ship missiles. War with Iran would make Vietnam seem like a walk in the park.

So Bolton and company are trying to destabilize Iran with empty threats. The claim of WMD and ties to Al Qaeda are meant to seem to be using the AUMF for the Iraq War for US military action. These are all empty threats. The EU is solidly being the JPCOA, much to Bolton's dismay. I just don't see the use of military.

My concern is that Israel will see this as a green light to make military strikes on Iran. But Iran is not helpless, unlike the Palestinians, and can strike back, tit for tat. Can Israel afford this? The analysis I read is that Israel would lose in an all out war. Their nukes are unusable, in my opinion as they would open Pandora's box, all hell would break lose, and no nation on Earth would support them, except for the US, and the Ukraine. I think that the US is in danger of losing its global clout. If it fails in its two current regime change attempts it will prove to be a paper tiger, and no nation will consider threats from the US to force regime change to be serious.

up

8 users have voted.

—

Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.

My concern is that Israel will see this as a green light to make military strikes on Iran. But Iran is not helpless, unlike the Palestinians, and can strike back, tit for tat. Can Israel afford this? The analysis I read is that Israel would lose in an all out war.

There are sects in both Judaism and Christianity, hoping for The Dome of the Rock to be blown up, or destroyed, so that Solomon's Temple can be rebuilt, and then the Jewish Messiah and/or Jesus will show up. I saw a video of some old rabbi guy telling a much younger Bibi to try harder to bring it on. In the same video, Christians were filmed saying the mosque needs to go.

Poking the bear might get that troublesome mosque to go away (along with its icky parishioners -- maybe curfews/laws forbidding Muslims from being in Jerusalem/Israel for "security purposes"), and will be yet another opportunity for Israel to play the victim again, all while attempting to force end times prophecy on the entire planet. Bonus!

Geography alone is an insurmountable problem. Remember how long it took to prepare for the Iraq invasion? Something like six months, and the US had a staging area. Iran's neighbors would not allow a US buildup to an invasion, and that includes Iraq who's legislature is about to kick out the US military. Iran has a healthy economy and military and military technology, unlike Iraq before the war. Iran has many allies, including Russia, China, and Turkey. Russia shares a border on the Caspian Sea and can ship as many supplies as needed to Iran. Iran, I believe has S400 air defense systems and lots of ground to ground and ground to ship missiles. War with Iran would make Vietnam seem like a walk in the park.

So Bolton and company are trying to destabilize Iran with empty threats. The claim of WMD and ties to Al Qaeda are meant to seem to be using the AUMF for the Iraq War for US military action. These are all empty threats. The EU is solidly being the JPCOA, much to Bolton's dismay. I just don't see the use of military.

My concern is that Israel will see this as a green light to make military strikes on Iran. But Iran is not helpless, unlike the Palestinians, and can strike back, tit for tat. Can Israel afford this? The analysis I read is that Israel would lose in an all out war. Their nukes are unusable, in my opinion as they would open Pandora's box, all hell would break lose, and no nation on Earth would support them, except for the US, and the Ukraine. I think that the US is in danger of losing its global clout. If it fails in its two current regime change attempts it will prove to be a paper tiger, and no nation will consider threats from the US to force regime change to be serious.